Comment: We don't need a constitutional convention.

(See in situ)


We don't need a constitutional convention.

What we need is to enforce the Constitution we have. To that end, we need to somehow elucidate what the Constitution really says.

Even if we could agree about what the Constitution really says and agree in principle that we should enforce it, we then face the monumental - if not virtually impossible - task of eliminating all the unconstitutional programs, laws, agencies and departments not allowed by the Constitution. This would involve returning power to the states and they would have to assume responsibility for programs - if they so choose - that were formerly unconstitutionally instituted in the federal government. (The Department of Education is an obvious example.)

My principle of constitutional interpretation is very simple. Any interpretation that favors an increase in the power of the federal government ought to be dismissed out of hand.

Just think --

No more wars unless declared by Congress.
No more Federal Reserve and a return to constitutional money - gold and silver. This would help facilitate balanced budgets.
No more subsidies to special interest groups.
No more foreign aid.
No more Obamacare.